Most pro direct democracy parties in Europe are right wing, Germanies "far right" party have it as a top priority in their manifesto, only below things like immigration/border control are above it.

Ukip is a supporter of direct democracy, most parties that are apart of the direct democracy party of the eu are right wing etc. If it wasn't for labour in the uk direct democracy would be held in monopoly in Europe by the right.

Most pro direct democracy parties in Europe are right wing, Germanies "far right" party have it as a top priority in their manifesto, only below things like immigration/border control are above it.

Ukip is a supporter of direct democracy, most parties that are apart of the direct democracy party of the eu are right wing etc. If it wasn't for labour in the uk direct democracy would be held in monopoly in Europe by the right.

It is actually quite surprising; you would expect the right of Europe to be the 'strong leader and powerful nation' lot like in the United States, with the left-wing being the pro-democracy parties.

It is actually quite surprising; you would expect the right of Europe to be the 'strong leader and powerful nation' lot like in the United States, with the left-wing being the pro-democracy parties.

We in the anglosphere have an American-centric view of the right, but it's more complex than that. There are 2 major dimensions that define right wing philosophy, ie the political graph/political compass demonstrates it well, but for much of Europe, the massive authoritarian force was left wing, ie the soviet union, for a very long time. (2-3 generations in fact). You also have to see the nature of conservatives in europe vs america, yes the right likes its strong leaders but your strong nation is not gonna fool anyone if your population is only 10 million for example. European conservatives focus much more own their own country while American neocons are heavily external in political focus. However, the modern force that is causing serious damage to democracy and by extension freedom is centre left "liberalism" of the eu. The eu, being a technocratic/eurocratic entity that heavily favours such structures do not like democracy or direct democracy. It does not respect democratic outcomes of nation states which are meant to be sovereigns, and it has a frequent history of preferring to do things through political elites rather then the peoples of europe, ie you should see the constitution of europe, it failed to succeed in 3 european countries because the people's rejected it, so they copy and pasted it into a treaty called the treaty of lisbon which only need be approved by the legislatures of nations (ie their elites) , had literally almost all the same provisions with exception to article 50 and a few others. These domains are not exclusively left or right wing, it is entirely dependent on the ambitions of the left winger or right winger. For those who are on the right its maintaining their homelands cultures and sovereignty. For the left its some strange mish-mash of mass immigration, multiculturalism and globalism(which is where the authoritarianism comes into play from)

This is the unusual thing; I would call myself a liberal of the centre-left (if I had to put myself on the spectrum at all). However, I personally support the preservation of national culture and sovereignty, and am hesitant to accept multiculturalism. I am not, however, not accepting of multiculturalism because I am prejudice; I readily embrace things that are better than what I already have. Despite this, a lot of the imported culture is coming from Islamic countries and I am concerned that the imported culture from those countries may negatively impact on the rights and privileges that women, homosexuals and the like enjoy.

I am not, however, not accepting of multiculturalism because I am prejudice; I readily embrace things that are better than what I already have. Despite this, a lot of the imported culture is coming from Islamic countries and I am concerned that the imported culture from those countries may negatively impact on the rights and privileges that women, homosexuals and the like enjoy.

> Seeing a liberal raise concerns regarding the treatment of women and minorities in relation to Islamic culture

Liberals, on the whole, being really touchy and not wanting to speak out really annoys me! A liberal that refuses to condemn the poor treatment of women, homosexuals and other minorities because it may seem like they are criticising religion is not a good liberal in my eyes.

What I don't understand is the tendency of some liberals to identify criticism of religious values, especially religious political values (Islamism) as some sort of racism. So long as your criticism is maintained to the values being espoused and not generalised against all members of a religion, it's an absurd criticism to make.

I totally agree. This is why I love people like Prof. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher; something that has white people, black people, Asian people and mixed-raced people within it, and who can leave at any time is not a race.

We can blame this on the regressive left - the new wave of students who do not like their views contradicted and who are the 'do gooders' with the rose-tinted specs.

Being in sixth form, I can confirm that the teachers seem to fall into this category. My sociology teacher has been talking about how most teachers in the college are anti-capitalist and, I can imagine, touchy to cultural criticism.